THE PROVIDENCE OF GOD
The
debate over the providence of God is not just something that has implications
for theology students or those who find themselves in the academy. The way someone thinks about divine
providence is largely determined by how that person views God; and the way
someone views God and his providence usually determines how that person views
every aspect of life. This is certainly
not a new subject to discuss. It has
been debated for hundreds of years.
There are two views of divine providence that dominate evangelicalism
today, namely, the Calvinist view and the Arminian view.
The
best description of the Calvinist view of divine providence comes from the
Westminster Confession of Faith which states:
God, from all eternity, did, by the most wise and holy counsel of his
own will, freely, and unchangeably
ordain whatsoever comes to pass: yet so, as thereby neither is God the author
of sin, nor is violence offered to the will of the creatures; nor is the
liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but rather established.[1]
This position states that God is
absolutely sovereign over everything, including all the events of the world
history. God is not merely a spectator
watching these events unfold before his eyes.
God governs and ordains them according to his sovereign will. The purpose behind God’s ordaining and
governing everything in the world is for the displaying his glory.[2] This is a short summary of the Calvinist view
of divine providence which will be examined in more detail shortly.
The
Arminian view takes a different approach to interpreting God’s providence. This view goes a very different route when
compared to the position espoused by men such as Augustine, Luther, and
Calvin. John Wesley, the founder of the
Methodist denomination, “did not interpret divine providence to mean that every
single human act was ordained by God. In
this way he distinguished between God’s permissive
will on the one hand, and his directive
will on the other.”[3] This approach attempts to still uphold the
sovereignty of God but redefines it to mean that “God sovereignly chooses not
to meticulously control everything.”[4] The Wesleyan-Arminian tradition then takes
the opposite approach to the Calvinistic-Reformed view in that it asserts that
“providence does not mean the divine predetermination of historical
events. It means rather the provision
that such events may be affected by reason, grace, and hope.”[5] This is the view that will be examined first
in the light of historical theology and the Scriptures.
Divine
Providence According to the Arminian-Wesleyan View
The
first thing that must be established here is that the Arminian view of divine
providence still maintains that God is sovereign over the universe. The Arminian view of God and his sovereign
control is not heretical. This is a
debate between Christians who love Jesus and love the Bible. However, though this view is not heretical,
it does seem to be in error when it is analyzed and compared to what the
Scriptures reveal about the sovereignty of God.
One
of the reasons that Arminian-Wesleyan theologians hold to this type of
sovereignty in which the world and its events are not meticulously controlled
or foreordained by God is that
throughout Scripture God commands people to choose him or to follow him.[6] This of course, according to the Arminian
view, implies that man has the ability
to choose God. This concept is espoused
by the Wesleyan tradition and they define this ability as prevenient grace.[7] “Prevenient grace provides people with the
ability to choose or reject God. As
sinners born in Adam, they had no ability to do good or to choose what is
right. But as recipients of prevenient
grace they can once again choose the good.”[8] The logic is that since God commands men to choose him that they must have the
ability to do so or else God cannot hold them accountable for their
rebellion. This is seen clearly in the
following excerpt from an essay on the Arminian view of providence:
People are free, which is why Scripture consistently holds them responsible
for what they do. For example, when
Solomon did “evil in the sight of the Lord,” it was because “his heart had
turned away from the Lord” (1 Kings 11:6, 9; cf. 2 Chron. 12:14). If the Lord was himself the cause of
Solomon’s turning from him, this passage makes no sense.[9]
However, it was Solomon himself who
said, “The king’s heart is a stream of water in the hand of the Lord; he turns
it wherever he will.”[10] Though Solomon chose to turn away and rebel,
God was certainly not surprised by this.
More than that, it was infallibly foreknown by God that Solomon would
turn “away from the Lord” and in that sense it was also foreordained or
predetermined. Concerning Proverbs 21:1,
A.W. Pink said, “What could be more explicit?
Out of the heart are ‘the issues of life’ (Prov. 4:23), for as a man
‘thinketh in his heart, so is he’ (Prov. 23:7).
If then the heart is in the hand of the Lord, and if “He turneth it
whithersoever He will,” then is it not clear that men, yea, governors and
rulers, and so all men, are completely beneath the governmental control of the
Almighty!”[11]
A
second reason for Arminians to define the doctrine of divine providence in the
manner that they do is that “God is often disappointed and frustrated by their
[human] choices.”[12] The logic is that God cannot possibly
foreordain, determine, or govern the actions of men because if he did he would
not be disappointed and frustrated by them.
The statement concerning God’s disposition right before the worldwide flood
is often cited to prove this point. The
Scripture says, “And the Lord was sorry that he had made man on the earth, and
it grieved him to his heart.”[13] According to the Arminian position, “These
passages do not make sense if in fact God secretly controls everything people
do. A person cannot grieve, frustrate,
or resist you if you exercise exhaustive control over that person.”[14] This seems as though it is a logical position
at first glance but there are verses in Scripture that refute this
proposition. One clear example of God
willing or ordaining that men ultimately disobey him in spite of the fact that
he commands them to obey him is in 1 Samuel 2:25.[15] The son of Eli were acting in wickedness in
that they would “lay with women who were serving at the entrance to the tent of
meeting” (1 Sam. 2:22). God has made it
clear throughout the Scriptures that he commands people not to be sexually
immoral. As the Apostle Paul said to the
church at Thessalonica, “For this is the will
of God, your sanctification: that you
abstain from sexual immorality; that each one of you know how to control his
own body in holiness and honor, not in the passion of lust like the Gentiles
who do not know God.”[16] Eli rebuked his sons for this wicked behavior
but they would not listen to his admonitions.
Certainly Eli’s sons did not obey their father because they did not want
to do so. But what was the ultimate
cause of their willful disobedience according to the text? “But they would not listen to the voice of
their father, for it was the will of the Lord to put them to death” (1 Sam. 2:25). The thoughtful exposition of Dr. John Piper
is helpful in understanding this text:
Why would the sons of Eli not give heed to their father’s good
counsel? The answer of the text is
“because the Lord desired to put them to death.” This makes sense only if the Lord had the
right and the power to restrain their disobedience - a right and power that he
willed not to use. Thus we must say that
in one sense God willed that the sons of Eli go on doing what he commanded them
not to do; dishonoring their father and committing sexual immorality.[17]
A
third reason for the Arminian view of divine providence, and the last one to be
examined in this essay, is that “the Lords choice not to control everything is
clearly manifested in the ministry of Jesus Christ.”[18] The following excerpt, from which the
previous quote was taken, will help to clarify what is in view here:
Throughout his ministry, Jesus treated infirmities and cases of
demonization as things that his Father did not will. Indeed, the purpose of his ministry was to
carry out the Father’s will – to spread his Father’s kingdom – by opposing such
things. If God’s sovereign will was
behind the infirmities and cases of demonization that Jesus confronted, we
would have to conclude that God’s kingdom was “divided against itself” and thus
could not stand.[19]
This argument stands in direct
opposition with the clear teaching of Scripture. The author of the previously cited essay
claims that God’s sovereign will was not what was ultimately behind the cause
of the many infirmities and illnesses that Jesus’ healed. When Moses tried to make and excuses to God
as to why he could not speak on behalf of the Lord, God said, “Who has made
man’s mouth? Who makes him mute, or
deaf, or seeing, or blind? Is it not I,
the Lord?”[20] God reveals that it is him who makes men
mute, deaf, blind, or seeing. If men are
born blind and deaf because of the will of God, which Exodus 4:11 clearly
establishes, Psalm 139 puts a new perspective on it. It puts more Bible underneath the absolute
sovereignty and providence of God. David
says of God, “For you formed me my inward parts; you knitted me together in my
mother’s womb.”[21] God is the one who forms us and knits us
together according to his sovereign will and pleasure. For the Arminian to deny this is to do
terrible violence to the clear teaching of Scripture.
Divine
Providence According to the Calvinistic-Reformed View
In
the introduction of this essay, the Calvinist view of divine providence was
defined by citing Chapter 3 and Article 1 of the Westminster Confession of
Faith. Another good definition of the
Calvinistic-Reformed view of divine providence is given by Bruce A. Ware. It is as follows:
God continually oversees and directs all things pertaining to the
created order in such a way that 1) he preserves in existence and provides for
the creation he has brought into being, and 2) he governs and reigns supremely
over the entirety of the whole of creation in order to fulfill all of his
intended purposes in it and through it.[22]
The aim of this
portion of the essay is to examine particular texts of the Bible that teach us that
God is absolutely sovereign over everything that happens and governs it in such
a way as to display his glory. This
includes sin, disease, infirmities, natural disasters, and most important of
all, the substitutionary atonement of Christ on the cross for sinners. The presence of evil and the crucifixion of
Christ will be the focus of the final portion of this essay. Because of the inclusion of the refutations
of the Arminian-Wesleyan propositions, this section will be slightly shorter in
length.
The fall of man
into sin must be included under the governance of God’s providence. Adam was certainly created without a sinful
nature, and therefore not in bondage to it.
He could make choices freely. But
God created the world knowing and determining that sin would be a part of
it. We learn from the book of Proverbs
that, “The Lord has made everything for its purpose, even the wicked for the
day of trouble.”[23] The ultimate purpose for God allowing and
foreordaining the fall of man was the glory of his Son.[24] This is explained well in the following
statement from Dr. John Piper:
Remember what we have seen about God’s permission: Whatever God
permits, he permits for a reason. And
his reasons are always infinitely wise and purposeful. He did not have to let the Fall of Satan or
of Adam happen. He could have stopped
it. The fact that he did not stop it
means he has a reason, a purpose for it.
And he doesn’t make up his plans as he goes along. What he knows to be wise, he has always known
to be wise – eternally. Therefore,
Adam’s sin and the Fall of the human race with him into sin and misery did not
take God off guard. It is part of God’s
overarching plan with the aim of it all to display the fullness of the glory of
Jesus Christ.[25]
The actual “How?” and “Why?” of the
Fall have eluded even the greatest of theologians. Adam and Eve had no sinful nature with which
to battle. The serpent “deceived” Eve (1
Tim. 2:14), but she was still aware of the clear command of God not to eat of
the fruit (Gen 3:3). Free will doesn’t
really provide a satisfactory answer because it does not ultimately provide an
answer as to why a sin-free being would choose to do evil.[26] At this point, it is humble to simply state,
“I do not know the solution to the problem of evil.”[27] John Calvin responded similarly, “For if God,
as Paul testifies, “dwells in unapproachable light” (1 Tim. 6:16), if the same
apostle with good reason exclaims that his ways are inscrutable (Rom. 11:33),
why am I not allowed to marvel at his secret will even though it is concealed
from us?”[28]
So if God permitted and ordained that sin come
into the world as part of his plan to glorify his Son, are there texts in the
Bible to support this? Yes. Revelation 13:8 says, “And all who dwell on
earth will worship it, everyone whose name has not been written before the
foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb that was slain.” Dr. Piper says of this verse, “So there was a
book before the foundation of the world called ‘the book of life of the Lamb who
was slain.’ Before the world was
created, God had already planned that his Son would be slain like a lamb to
save all those who are written in the book.”[29]
2
Timothy 1:9 makes this same argument.
“[God] saved us and called us to a holy calling, not because of our
works but because of his own purpose of grace, which he gave us in Christ Jesus
before the ages began.”[30] This passage is quite shocking in that it
reveals that God planned to show mercy and grace to people before sin had
entered the world. According to the text, “saving grace was given
to us before the ages began. That is, it
was given to us before there was any human sin to save us from.”[31] This is not the way that you would hear the
cross and grace described in the pulpit or from the podium, but this is the way
the Word of God describes them. Dr.
Piper further states regarding this text:
Therefore, grace was planned before human sin was there to need
it. This means that God’s plan to save
us through grace was not a response to human decisions to sin. Saving grace was the plan that made sin
necessary. God did not find sin in the
world and then make a plan to remedy it.
He had the plan before the ages, and that plan was for the glory of
sin-conquering grace through the death of Jesus Christ.[32]
The
cross of Christ is the most straightforward event revealing that God’s
providence is determinative and exhaustive.
Acts 4:27-28 says, “For truly in this city there were gathered together
against your holy servant Jesus, whom you anointed, both Herod and Pontius
Pilate, along with the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel, to do whatever your
hand and your plan had predestined to take place.” This text explicitly says that it is by God’s
power and foreordination that the most evil, wicked event in the history of the
world took place. Herod mocked
Jesus. Pilate condemned and innocent
man. The Jews called out “Crucify,
crucify him!” (Luke 23:21). And the
Roman soldiers (Gentiles, Acts 4:27) spit, beat, mocked and crucified the
glorious Son of God. God’s supreme
providence brought about the salvation of sinners by planning and predestinating the
most heinous sins in the history of the universe. Dr. Piper states the following concerning the
cross of Christ:
All these were explicitly in God’s mind before they actually happened
as things that he planned would happen to Jesus. These things did not just happen. They were foretold in God’s word. God knew they would happen and could have
planned to stop them, but didn’t. So
they happened according to his sovereign will.
His plan. And all of them were
evil. They were sin. It is surpassingly sinful to reject, hate,
abandon, betray, deny, condemn, spit upon, flog, mock, pierce, and kill the
morally perfect, infinitely worthy, divine Son of God. And yet the Bible is explicit and clear that
God himself planned these things.[33]
May
the doctrine of divine providence, as it is rightly espoused in the
Calvinistic-Reformed view, drive men and women to see God as the sovereign,
glorious, all-powerful, King of the Universe and rejoice in his amazing,
inscrutable ways! When God’s people see
this truth about God and delight in it, they will say with Augustine:
You are ever active, yet always at rest. You gather all things to yourself, though you
suffer no need…You grieve for wrong, but suffer no pain. You can be angry and yet serene. Your works are varied, but your purpose is
one and the same…You welcome those who come to you, though you never lost
them. You are never in need yet are glad
to gain, never covetous yet you exact a return for your gifts…You release us
from debts, but you lose nothing thereby.
You are my God, my Life, my holy Delight, but is this enough to say of
you? Can any man say enough when he
speaks of you? Yet woe betide those who
are silent about you![34]
Bibliography
Boyd, Gregory A. and Paul R.
Eddy. Across the Spectrum: Understanding Issues in Evangelical
Theology, 2nd
ed. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic,
2009.
Calvin, John. The
Secret Providence of God, ed. Paul Helm.
Translated by Keith Goad.
Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 2010.
Dorman, Ted M. A Faith
for All Seasons: Historic Christian Belief in Its Classical Expression.
Nashville, TN: B&H Publishing Group,
2001.
Grenz, Stanley J., David Guretzki
and Cherith Fee Nordling. Pocket Dictionary of Theological
Terms. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press,
1999.
Grudem, Wayne. Systematic
Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine.
Grand Rapids,
MI: Zondervan, 1994.
Pink, Arthur W. The
Sovereignty of God. Grand Rapids,
MI: Baker Books, 1984.
Piper, John. The
Legacy of Sovereign Joy: God’s Triumphant Grace in the Lives of Augustine,
Luther, and Calvin. Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 2000.
________. Spectacular
Sins and Their Global Purpose in the Glory of Christ. Wheaton, IL:
Crossway Books, 2008.
Schreiner, Thomas R., and Bruce
A. Ware, eds. Still Sovereign: Contemporary Perspectives on
Election, Foreknowledge, and
Grace. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker
Books, 2000.
Sproul, R.C. The
Invisible Hand: Do Al Things Really Work for Good? Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R
Publishing Company, 2003.
Ware, Bruce A. God’s
Greater Glory: The Exalted God of Scripture and the Christian Faith.
Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 2004.
Endnotes
[1]Chapter
3, Article 1 of the Westminster Confession of Faith as printed in Appendix 1 of
Wayne Grudem’s Systematic Theology: An
Introduction to Biblical Doctrine (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1994),
1181.
[2]R.C.
Sproul, The Invisible Hand: Do All Things
Really Work Together for Good? (Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing
Company, 2003), 21.
[3]Ted M.
Dorman, A Faith for All Seasons: Historic
Christian Belief in Its Classical Expression, 2nd ed.
(Nashville, TN: B&H Publishing Group, 2001), 92.
[4]Gregory
A. Boyd and Paul R. Eddy, Across the
Spectrum: Understanding Issues in Evangelical Theology, 2nd ed.
(Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2009), 41.
[7]The
definition of prevenient grace is as
follows: “A designation of the priority of God’s gracious initiative on behalf
of humans. Hence the term refers to the
gracious action of God, displayed in the person and work of Christ but present
in the lives of human beings through the agency of the Holy Spirit, which
precedes all human response to God’s initiative. Calvinists view prevenient grace as that
aspect of special grace by which God redeems, sanctifies and glorifies
believers; hence, it is bestowed only on those whom God elects to eternal life
through faith in Jesus Christ. For
Wesley (and consequently for many Arminians) prevenient grace is the Holy
Spirit’s work in the hearts of all people, which gives them the freedom to say
yes to the gospel; thus prevenient grace can be accepted or rejected, but
justification cannot be achieved without it.”
Stanley J. Grenz, David Guretzki, and Cherith Fee Nordling, Pocket Dictionary of Theological Terms (Downers
Grove: IL, InterVarsity Press, 1999), 95.
[8]Thomas
R. Schreiner, “Does Scripture Teach Prevenient Grace in the Wesleyan Sense?” in
Still Sovereign: Contemporary
Perspectives on Election, Foreknowledge, and Grace, eds. Thomas R.
Schreiner and Bruce A. Ware (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2000), 236.
[15]The
distinction made here concerning God willing
or ordaining that men disobey him
even though he wills or commands that they obey him by giving
and upholding the Law can be better understood from the following: “It implies
that God decrees one state of affairs while also willing and teaching that a
different state of affairs should come to pass.
This distinction in the way God wills has been expressed in various ways
throughout the centuries. It is not a
new contrivance. For example,
theologians have spoken of sovereign will and moral will, efficient will and
permissive will, secret will and revealed will, will of decree and will of
command, decretive will and preceptive will, voluntas signi (will of sign) and voluntas beneplaciti (will of good pleasure).” John Piper, “Are There Two Wills in God?” in Still Sovereign, eds. Thomas R.
Schreiner and Bruce A. Ware (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2000), 109.
[17]John Piper,
“Are There Two Wills in God?” in Still
Sovereign, eds. Thomas R. Schreiner and Bruce A. Ware (Grand Rapids, MI:
Baker Books, 2000), 117.
[22]Bruce
A. Ware, God’s Greater Glory: The Exalted
God of Scripture and the Christian Faith (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books,
2004), 17.
[24]John
Piper, Spectacular Sins and Their Global
Purpose in the Glory of Christ (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 2008), 57-58.
No comments:
Post a Comment